KNOWING vs. BELIEVING — Jim Sawyer 9-29-25
As an entering freshman at Utah State University under the long-ago mentorship of debate coach Rex Robinson, I placed first in a novel intercollegiate forensic competition, then-called parliamentary speaking. That year I lived with three other guys in a Swiss immigrant Mormon couple’s basement—the Hansens—on Third East near Tenth North. Soon however, my paths led away from Logan, toward a Mormon mission and beyond. [See more biographical information, below]
I became a leader of 15-20 New Zealand Mormon missionaries, called zone leader, and used the position also to steer around enforcement of a frequently preached Mormon dictum. That dictum was—and is—to testify that one “knows” the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is “the true church.” Instead, I encouraged missionaries to use words more carefully, hopefully choosing, in place of “I know,” rather, “I believe.”
Believing is not necessarily synonymous with knowing, of course.
For over a century, America has stood as a bastion of science and science-like inquiry about what it means “to know” and how that stands apart from what it means “to believe,” merely. Indeed, USU is anchored as a knowledge-based institution by the Morrill Act of 1862 that was signed by President Abraham Lincoln. As such, it was Lincoln’s action that enabled USU’s founding as a federally subsidized, land-grant institution in 1888, to pursue research, education and public service, in scientific fields particularly although not exclusively.
How then may Utah State University and other Morrill Act-supported universities, and other related institutions as well, distinguish between acts of knowing and acts of believing? Illustrations from my childhood offer clarity, I believe.
With various friends—I refer to a “composite” childhood friend named Brent—we would hike in the mountains above our Ogden neighborhood, starting around Harrison Boulevard and 27th Street, near Ogden High School. As we hiked toward Malan’s or Mount Ogden Peaks, Brent and I would play thought games. Two are mentioned here to distinguish between what it means “to know” vs. what it means “to merely believe.”
Regarding the former, as we hiked, Brent and I might speculate about “what time is it?” After each had made their best time guesstimate, we’d reach into one of our day packs and pull out a watch that was set accurately to tell Mountain Time, derived of course from GMT [Greenwich Mean Time]. Consultation would confirm the winner, and the loser also. However, in a sharing way, we were likely to locate a treat in one of our day packs—perhaps soft cinnamon bears—that would be shared equally, regardless of one’s winning or losing status. So concluded our knowledge-based game/thought experiment. It seemed much more pleasant to be able to end in a state of cooperation, rather than one ending in disagreement and chaos.
However, the other Brent-Jim thought game/experiment was belief-based rather than knowledge-based, for which there was neither a “right” nor a “wrong” answer. Therefore, it could lead, not to consensus-based cooperation, but to disagreement and even friction. Here’s how that sometimes worked.
Brent’s family was far more religiously orthodox than mine, in a very Mormon sense. So, in this second belief-oriented thought game, Brent might begin this way. He might “testify” that he “knows” Mormon founder Joseph Smith was indeed a prophet of God, that Joseph temporarily received engraved golden plates from an extraterrestrial being named “Angel Moroni,” and that Smith translated the plates prior to handing them back to the angel for safe keeping, somewhere.
When it was my turn, however, I’d likely offer an alternative explanation of the Book of Mormon’s origin, such as this one passed down from my non-Mormon grandfather, George. Grandfather George would point out that in his opinion, the Book of Mormon is merely a belief, and therefore not a known in any scientific sense. Thus, Grandpa might conclude with this assertion, to also be passed along by me—to Brent and others—that the Book of Mormon is less a product of heavenly inspiration and more a product of human ingenuity, either on the part of Joseph Smith as its creator-originator, or some other mortal human being.
What then could the Brent/Jim thought games—ongoing during arduous childhood hikes—teach one, the other, or both of us? I submit this, which I believe is highly pertinent to contemporary searching within America’s complex religious and political environs.
First, to believe is not to know, necessarily. [See for instance the philosophy of science contributions of Karl Popper.] The use of caution is appropriate in all cases, especially those in which belief-based political or religious hypotheses become subjected to public scrutiny.
Second, hypotheses that lead toward knowing are much more likely to produce consensus. Conversely, those that lead only toward expressions of beliefs rather than knowns are more likely to produce conflict.
Third, appropriate respect for one’s opponent/s and their hypotheses is crucial, particularly in belief-based situations that are not resolvable by appeal to knowns only, particularly if knowns do not exist. Thus said, one’s belief-based hypotheses, when expressed publicly, are no more likely to produce universal consensus than someone else’s belief-based hypotheses.
Fourth, scientifically, any knowledge-based hypothesis must contain, also, not only provision for its objective validation [such as GMT time validation], but provision also for its objective invalidation, as a particular situation may require. Otherwise, it must fall under the category of belief-based rather than knowledge-based.
So, where do we go from here, in our complex world circumscribed by religious and political conflict? My suggestion? That we subscribe universally to the careful acknowledgement that believing is not knowing, and therefore one’s beliefs should be submitted with humble awareness they can neither be validated nor invalidated, in any objective sense.
SO, LET’S GET ON WITH IT!
BIO:
Jim Sawyer grew up in Ogden, in a mixed religion family in which his mother’s pedigree extends through Scottish Mormon polygamists. On his father’s side however, Jim is descended from non-Mormon immigrants who began their Utah-bound journeys in the southern states of Missouri and Texas.
Following a Mormon mission, he graduated in psychology from Weber State, worked as special assistant to Utah Governor Cal Rampton, and completed a PhD in economics at the University of Utah. Then Jim spent three+ decades as a faculty member at Jesuit-sponsored Seattle University where Jim’s title remains professor emeritus. Some other SU titles have included director of the Institute of Public Service, member of the council of academic deans, citizenship instructor, and holder of the Reverend Louis Gaffney, S.J. Chair, sometimes referred to casually as a chair in ethics. Sawyer also served Fulbright fellowships at universities in France and Portugal.
Publications by Jim/James E. Sawyer include Yo Mitt (Amazon, 2024) and Why Reaganomics and Keynesian Economics Failed (Palgrave Macmillan/London, 1988).
Contact:
USPO mailbox 272552
Fort Collins, CO 80525
Considering our present situation juxtaposed against America’s past, consider also the exemplary life modeled by America’s sixteenth president…
ABRAHAM LINCOLN 1809-1865; U.S. President, 1861-1865
LINCOLN’S ASSASSINATION: AI Overview
On April 14, 1865, President Abraham Lincoln was assassinated by John Wilkes Booth, a Confederate sympathizer, while attending a play at Ford's Theatre in Washington, D.C. The assassination was part of a larger conspiracy to revive the Confederate cause by eliminating key Union officials.
ATTRIBUTES OF PRESIDENT ABRAHAM LINCOLN Ai Artificial Intelligence has been employed in construction of this list.
Abraham Lincoln's core principles were rooted in the American Founding documents—the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution—with an emphasis on preserving the Union, equality, individual liberty, and government "of the people, by the people, for the people. He grounded these political ideals in a personal philosophy of honesty, empathy, and humility.
Preservation of the Union: For Lincoln, the Civil War was a test of whether a nation founded on the principle of equality could survive. He believed secession was illegal and saw his primary duty as president to be holding the country together.
Equality for all: Lincoln consistently argued that the Declaration of Independence's promise of "liberty to all" was the moral foundation of the United States. While he initially prioritized saving the Union, the Emancipation Proclamation solidified the war's purpose around a "new birth of freedom" that included the end of slavery.
Self-governance and democracy: Lincoln championed the principle that government should be "of the people, by the people, for the people". He believed that for self-government to endure, the majority must not override the basic rights of individuals.
Respect for the rule of law: Despite the unprecedented crisis of the Civil War, Lincoln navigated his presidential actions within the constitutional framework, which he had sworn to preserve, protect, and defend. His legal career impressed upon him that all events had a cause and were governed by laws.
OTHER ATTRIBUTES OF AMERICA’S SIXTEENTH PRESIDENT
Honesty and integrity: Known as “Honest Abe,” Lincoln's reputation for truthfulness was a central component of his character. He was steadfast in doing what was right, not just what was politically expedient.
Empathy and humility: Lincoln had a deep empathy for the common person, and his humility allowed him to surround himself with a "team of rivals" and admit when he was wrong. This emotional intelligence allowed him to build trust and rally people to a greater cause.
Courage and perseverance: Throughout his career, Lincoln faced numerous challenges and defeats but remained steadfast in his vision. His leadership was defined by his resilience and unwavering determination, holding on with a “bulldog grip”.
Communication and persuasion: Lincoln was a master communicator who could connect with people through storytelling and eloquence. He believed persuasion was more effective than coercion and used his speeches and conversations to build trust and convey his vision.
Continuous learning: A self-educated lawyer, Lincoln had a lifelong commitment to learning and personal improvement. He was constantly reading and seeking knowledge on various topics, including military strategy, to improve his leadership.
LINCOLN ATTRIBUTES, CONTINUING
Emphasis of the common good:
Lincoln cultivated civic virtue by fostering a sense of common purpose, promoting the rule of law, and recognizing natural rights for the betterment of society.
Capacity to make tough, principled decisions:
Emphasis upon trial and error to foster improvement:
Lincoln embraced continuous improvement and learning, not shying away from trials and errors to find effective solutions, such as with his generals in the Civil War.
President Lincoln promoted key civic virtues such as honesty, courage, justice, humility, perseverance, and empathy, which he demonstrated through his actions and leadership during a time of national crisis. He championed freedom and equal opportunity, valued the rule of law and fairness, and showed a remarkable ability to listen to different perspectives while remaining firm in his principles.
Civic virtues Lincoln exemplified:
Lincoln was known for his truthfulness and principled nature even before becoming president, embodying trust and fairness in his dealings with others.
Courage and perseverance:
He faced fears and overcome defeats, showing a strong will to continue his work despite setbacks, and he encouraged this resilience in others.
Lincoln's political philosophy was grounded in a belief in equal opportunity and freedom, and he strove for actions that were fair and right, particularly in the context of the unfolding Declaration of Independence's principles.
Humility and Compassion:
Despite his high office, Lincoln treated others with humility, respect, and kindness, which served as a crucial lesson in leadership.
Empathy and Emotional Intelligence:
His ability to understand and regulate his own emotions while also empathizing with others allowed him to build strong relationships and navigate the intense pressures of his time.
Wisdom and Open-mindedness:
Lincoln possessed the capacity to listen to diverse viewpoints, learn on the job, and demonstrate awareness of his own weaknesses, which contributed to his strong leadership.
Self-Reliance and Hard Work:
These qualities were central to Lincoln's character, contributing to his ability to lead effectively and inspire others.
Charity and reconciliation. In his Second Inaugural Address, with the war nearing its end, Lincoln called for a virtuous path toward reconciliation with "malice toward none, with charity for all". He asked Americans to avoid retribution and instead work toward a "just and lasting peace," demonstrating that true civic virtue requires empathy and a focus on healing the nation's wounds.
The Debate Style That Propelled Charlie Kirk’s Movement
By Ken Bensinger and Charlie Smart, New York Times